Ten-Day Time Period U/S 99 Of IBC For Submission Of Report By Resolution Professional Is Directory, Not Mandatory: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that the 10-day period provided under Section 99 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code,2016 (Code) within which the Resolution Professional has to submit the report after appointment, cannot be considered mandatory, as no consequences are prescribed in the provision itself for failure to submit...

Service Of Notice On Email Provided In Section 7 Petition Constitutes Sufficient Compliance With Rule 38(1) Of NCLT Rules: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that service of notice on the email address provided in the petition filed under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (the Code) constitutes sufficient compliance with Rule 38(1) of the NCLT Rules. Brief Facts: Bank of Baroda (BoB) sanctioned a credit facility on 03.09.2024 to Our Company Infrastructure ...

Petition U/S Section 7 Of IBC Cannot Be Entertained Based On Guarantee Invoked During Prohibited Period U/S 10A Of IBC: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that the liability of the guarantor arises only when the guarantee executed by them in favor of the creditor is invoked. If such guarantee was invoked during the period prohibited under Section 10A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (the Code), an application under Section 7 of the Code cannot be maintained. Brief Facts: ...

IBC Weekly Round-Up [31st March-6th April 2025]

Nominal Index: Busy Bee Airways Pvt. Ltd. vs. Dinkar T Venkatasubramanian, Liquidator, Go Airlines (India) Ltd. & Ors.,Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.124 of 2025 with Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.175 of 2025 with Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.244 of 2025 RBL Bank Limited Vs Sical Logistics Limited and Ors., Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No.36/2024 (IA Nos. 106, 107 & 779/2024) Bahadur Ram Mallah Versus Assets Reconstruction Company (India) Limited...

NCLAT Upholds Liquidation Of Go Airlines, Permits Submission Of Compromise/Arrangement Within 90 Days Of Liquidation Order

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Barun Mitra (Technical Member) and Arun Baroka (Technical Member) have held that the Committee of Creditors (CoC), acting under its commercial wisdom and in accordance with Section 33(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, was within its rights to resolve to liquidate the Corporate Debtor, Go Airlines (India) Ltd., in the absence of any compliant resolution plan. The...

Dissenting Financial Creditors Are Entitled To Receive Payments On Pro-Rata Basis Of Resolution Plan Value Rather Than Liquidation Value: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) Chennai bench of Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma (Judicial Member) and Mr. Jatindranath Swain (Technical Member) has held that dissenting financial creditors are entitled to receive payments on a pro-rata basis of the Resolution Plan rather than the liquidation value. Further, it was held that priority in payment means that whenever the Successful Resolution Applicant remits the amount in installments, the dissenting financial creditors ...

Speculative Investment Without Commercial Effect Of Borrowing Not A 'Financial Debt': NCLT New Delhi

The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), New Delhi Bench-III, comprising Bachu Venkat Balaram Das (Judicial Member) and Shri Atul Chaturvedi (Technical Member) have dismissed an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, filed by M.K. Jain and family (Financial Creditors) against Krrish Realtech Pvt. Ltd. (Corporate Debtor) for default of Rs. 12.3 crore. The Tribunal held that the Applicant was a speculative investor and could not claim status and...

IBC Monthly Digest: March 2025

Nominal Index: Shri Krishan V. H.S Oberoi Buildtech Private Ltd.,Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 128 of 2025 Mr. Shailendra Singh, Resolution Professional of Foxdom Technologies Pvt Ltd vs. Directorate Of Enforcement & Anr., ΙΑ NO. 4689 OF 2023 IN IB-102(ND)/2022 Himanshu Singh, Suspended Director of Kriti Prakashan Private Limited Versus HDFC Bank Limited and Anr., Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 336 of 2025 Darwin Platform Infrastructure Limited vs ...

Breach Of Settlement Agreement Does Not Preclude Financial Creditors From Filing Application U/S 7 Of IBC: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that financial creditors are not precluded from filing an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code), merely because they have entered into a settlement agreement with the corporate debtor that was subsequently breached. The nature of the debt remains unchanged,...

IBC | Difference Between 'Avoidance Transactions' & 'Fraudulent Or Wrongful Trading' : Supreme Court Explains

The Supreme Court, in its recent decision in Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Ltd v. 63 Moons Technology explained the key difference between how the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 deals with avoidance transactions and transactions relating to fraudulent or wrongful trading. Notably, under the IBC 2016, 'avoidance transactions' are specific transactions conducted by a corporate debtor prior to insolvency proceedings that are deemed detrimental to the interests of creditors....

Adjudicating Authority Cannot Accept Report Of Resolution Professional Mechanically, Must Conduct Independent Assessment U/S 100 Of IBC: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that the Adjudicating Authority, while considering the report of the Resolution Professional submitted under Section 99 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code), must conduct its own independent assessment to determine whether all essential issues required for accepting or rejecting the...

S.61 IBC | When Judgment Is Pronounced In Open Court, Limitation Period Runs From That Day : Supreme Court

The Court also held that the benefit under S.12 of Limitation Act cannot be claimed when the party did not apply for certified copy.